Y did John not recognize Mary in Revelations?

[teadough]

Posted this same question to the Apologist section,but feel that I should have here due to length.

Is there a proper answer to give to a Protestant as to why John did not recognize the Woman wearing a crown with 12 stars as being what Catholics identify as Mary? John knew Mary so it would seem likely that he would have clarified that.

I am a new convert and feel that I am bound to get this question at some point in time. The funny thing is that I never even thought about it before I converted

Shine, T

 

[Mannyfit75]

Posted this same question to the Apologist section,but feel that I should have here due to length.

Is there a proper answer to give to a Protestant as to why John did not recognize the Woman wearing a crown with 12 stars as being what Catholics identify as Mary? John knew Mary so it would seem likely that he would have clarified that.

I am a new convert and feel that I am bound to get this question at some point in time. The funny thing is that I never even thought about it before I converted

Shine, T

John did recognized Mary as the Woman clothed with the sun in Revelation 12:1-5. Let me put out how he knows the woman is Mary. The male-child whom she will give birth will rule the world with an iron rod. He was taken up to heaven and to his throne. This child is Jesus. Who is the Mother of Jesus? Mary. There you go. The woman, therefore is Mary.

 

[teadough]

I understand your answer from a Catholic perspective,however,I guess that was not quite what I had in mind. Maybe I should re-word my question.

It would seem that if John knew Mary he would have recognize her as so and would have called her by name. See what I am getting at?

Trust me!! I am all about Mary. It was a struggle at first when I fisrt came to the Church 7 months ago. I now have a daily Rosary devotion. I could not imagine my prayer life without her

 

[Mannyfit75]

I understand your answer from a Catholic perspective,however,I guess that was not quite what I had in mind. Maybe I should re-word my question.

It would seem that if John knew Mary he would have recognize her as so and would have called her by name. See what I am getting at?

Trust me!! I am all about Mary. It was a struggle at first when I fisrt came to the Church 7 months ago. I now have a daily Rosary devotion. I could not imagine my prayer life without her

Tell me why did Jesus called Mary woman in the Gospel of John in the wedding feast at Cana, or at the cross when Jesus said to his mother, “Woman behold your son.”?

The term woman is commonly used by John to refer to Mary, mother of Jesus.

If you can answer these questions, you have your answer.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

It is also possible that even though John recognized her as Mary that the Holy Spirit did not want her to be named when John wrote the scripture.

Why?

Because the woman was Mary yes but other things,too.

Maybe some of you could correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the Catholic Church teach that it is permisable to believe that the woman is Mary but that Mary isn’t the only identity of the woman?

 

[teadough]

I just went to read that part of Revelation again. It is strange how as a Protestant I never even thought of the woman being Mary. I guess it was due to the fact that I thought this Revelation. I need to get some Catholic books on Revelations.Right now I am into the Catachism for my readings

The other tricky part of that chapter is where it says “17Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring”

How do we as Catholics explain the “her offspring” part if we believe she had no other children.

I hope I am not opening a can of worms with these questions:blush:

 

[juliamajor]

It’s probably a case of 'and/ or" that’s used in catholic theology. Example- mary is the mother of jesu(the man) and the mother of God. there is no contradiction. Mary is seen as the woman but also Israel is seen as the woman in travail. they are not contradictory as our separated brethren would have you believe.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. .
The other tricky part of that chapter is where it says “17Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring”

How do we as Catholics explain the “her offspring” part if we believe she had no other children. . . .

When Jesus gave Mary to John as his mother He gave her to all of us. We are the rest of her offspring.

It has been commented that she did well with her first son, but the rest of us are giving her gray hair.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I think he refers to her as woman because she fulfils the prophecy of Genesis 3:16. Note that Jesus also referred to her as woman at Cana.

I have seen it claimed that The Woman and The Apostle that Jesus Loved are the way the Church at Ephesus referred to Mary and John.

 

[pnewton]

John was writing in an apocholyptic style. The point was to use common symbolism that would have been obvious to the Christian reader of the day, but not to authorities. He also did not name the one who opened the scroll, but we don’t doubt that he recognized Jesus.

 

[teadough]

John was writing in an apocholyptic style. The point was to use common symbolism that would have been obvious to the Christian reader of the day, but not to authorities. He also did not name the one who opened the scroll, but we don’t doubt that he recognized Jesus.

Now we are getting somewhere.Thanks. That reminds me of how we obviously know what “The Lamb” is. When I look at it that way I can have a better way of giving a better explanation.

 

[spauline]

It is also possible that even though John recognized her as Mary that the Holy Spirit did not want her to be named when John wrote the scripture.

Why?

Because the woman was Mary yes but other things,too.

Maybe some of you could correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the Catholic Church teach that it is permisable to believe that the woman is Mary but that Mary isn’t the only identity of the woman?

Yes, in fact, the primary meaning of the woman, would not be Mary, but rather the Catholic Church, seeing as the primary layer of the Apoc is spiritual history, and therefore not minor historical events, but great spiritual ages of the Church.

 

[Lance_O]

I need to get some Catholic books on Revelations.Right now I am into the Catachism for my readings

I recommend Scott Hahn’s book “The Lambs Supper" which is about the book of Revelation in relationship to the Mass. It’s easy ready and has a section specifically on Rev 12.
I believe there is more that just one meaning for Rev 12. Obviously, the woman is Mary since the child is Jesus. But Rev 12 is also pointing to Mary as the “New” Ark of the Covenant since Rev11:19 the Ark of the Covenant is seen in the temple. From the OT (Ex 25:28-30, Num 17) the Ark of the Covent contained: the Ten Commandment s (Law/the Word), the Manna from the Desert, and Aaron’s Rod.
I’ve also have read the Rev 12 is pointing to Israel and 12 tribes (apostles) since it’s important to remember that Jesus’ lineage is of King David’s kingdom that doesn’t end (2Sam7:16).

The other tricky part of that chapter is where it says “17Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring”. How do we as Catholics explain the “her offspring” part if we believe she had no other children.

This is easier than it looks. First, if we are God the Father’s children by ‘adpoption’ with Jesus as our brother, then it’s easy to see us as spiriital children to Mary. See also John 19:26.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Posted this same question to the Apologist section,but feel that I should have here due to length.

Is there a proper answer to give to a Protestant as to why John did not recognize the Woman wearing a crown with 12 stars as being what Catholics identify as Mary? John knew Mary so it would seem likely that he would have clarified that.

I am a new convert and feel that I am bound to get this question at some point in time. The funny thing is that I never even thought about it before I converted

Shine, T

Short & inadequate answer - it is not at all certain, but is highly debatable, whether Mary is intended to be seen in the woman of Rev. 12.​

My own opinion on the matter is that the woman is not an individual person at all, but a personification. I can see no compelling reason for imagining the woman to be the BVM - it’s not as though that were either a traditional or unanimous interpretation. The interpretation of the woman as Mary ignores the fact that the Great Whore of 17 is not an individual person either but a personification. To say nothing of the oddity involved in treating the woman of 12 as the person Mary, when the dragon attacking her is a symbol, as is the river he vomits out; which strongly suggests the man-child is a symbol too. He can hardly be Christ in person, because Christ was never in danger of being eaten by a dragon. If the eating of the man-child is a symbol, & as the dragon is, & his vomited river - why is the woman not ? They are symbols - which strongly suggests the woman too is a symbol, & not an personal being, any more than the dragon is a personal being.

IMO, the woman is the Jerusalem Church, which shared with Mary the status of being related to the “poor ones”, the anawim. And a possible meaning of the dragon is as referring to the use of dragon standards in the Roman army, during the Jewish War of 66-73 for instance. There was also a Dragon Spring (Jackal Spring in some versions - the word used can mean either) at Jerusalem, which is mentioned by Nehemiah in the OT.

If the woman is Mary, that interpretation has to fit Revelation 12, Revelation as a whole, the literary genre employed in composing Revelation (apocalyptic, as it is known), & indeed the NT as a whole, both as to its theology & as to its way of speaking. IOW, does the interpretation fit all those contexts ? Does it fit any of them ? I think it leaves too much of its context unaccounted for.